Agenda item

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application to layout access roads and erect mixed use development, with residential, business,  retail, leisure and community uses, with car parking, public open spaces, riverside walkway and nature corridor. The Panel previously considered a report on this application on 5^th November 2009 (minute 41 refers)

(Report attached)

  Further to minute 41 of the Plans Panel City Centre meeting held on 5^th November 2009, where Panel considered a position statement on proposals for a mixed-use scheme on land at Kirkstall Road and Wellington Road, Members considered the formal outline application

  Plans, photographs and drawings were displayed at the meeting.  A site visit had taken place earlier in the day which Members had attended

  Officers presented the report and informed the Panel that the proposals were for a substantial new quarter in the city on a 5.3 hectare cleared brownfield site close to the city centre.  The outline application sought approval for siting and access only but a design code had been submitted which set out the proposed general scale of the buildings.  Detailed design issues would be considered in due course in the Reserved Matters application

  Revisions had been made to the scheme in line with the comments made at the November 2009 Panel

The development which would be carried out in a phased manner, comprised two sites which would be connected by a pedestrian and cycle bridge over the river. On the Kirkstall Road frontage there would be 6 buildings with a mix of uses including residential, offices, food and drink uses with ancillary retail and a community use together with a multi storey car park, underground parking and an area of public open space. The Island site opposite would be predominantly for residential use with some ground floor food and drink uses around an area of public open space. On the Island site an area of townhouses was also proposed. Underground car parking would be provided on both sides of the river. Overall, approximately one third of the site would be public open space

  In response to questions raised on the site visit by Members, the Head of Planning Services stated that the proposed levels related to the need to address flooding issues and build in mitigation measures required by the Flood Alleviation Scheme, with the ground level of buildings on the Kirkstall Road Riverside site being set half a storey higher than the existing ground level of the site.  The Island site was much higher and the excavation would be to a depth of 1.5 -1.8m with the development set at the same as the footpath to the canal.

  In terms of flood risk, Members were informed that the greatest risk was from Kirkstall Road as this was the lowest point and to address this, no ground level residential accommodation would be included on this site

  Details in the design code indicated the erection of 14 buildings across both sites, with the buildings on the Kirkstall Road Riverside site being maximum 9-10 storeys in height.  Smaller scale buildings ie 3-8 storeys were proposed for the Island site with the opportunity for a taller, landmark building being sited at the narrowest point of the site

  Access arrangements were outlined, with Panel being informed that the main vehicular access to the mixed-use site would be from Kirkstall Road between the two office blocks with the multi-storey car park and basement car parking being accessed from this point. Pedestrian and cycle access would be enhanced through the creation of a wider footway to provide a boulevard frontage which would lead down to the open space area

  The Island site would be totally pedestrianised apart from emergency and service vehicles and some disabled parking spaces by the town houses, as vehicular access to the basement parking would be from an adjacent access road

  The Panel’s Highways representative outlined the highway improvements required and stated that the developer contributions for this scheme would help to fund improvements elsewhere

  Members were informed that the central reservation along Kirkstall Road would be modified to signalise the access into the development site and provide a right hand turn. A pedestrian crossing facility in two phases would be provided across Kirkstall Road. It was anticipated that these measures could be controlled to ensure there was no detriment to the Quality Bus Initiative (QBI) as funding for the scheme had been given by the Department for Transport on the understanding that there should not be, within 10 years of its opening, any changes to the scheme which would have an adverse impact on the bus corridor.  Whilst the DFT had indicated verbally there would not be a problem with these proposals, written agreement had yet to be obtained and if Panel was minded to accept the Officer’s recommendation, this would be an additional reason for deferring and delegating the application to the Chief Planning Officer

  Further highway improvements were outlined in respect of the Westgate gyratory, egress from the Armley gyratory onto Wellington Road and at the M621 Islington roundabout.

Funding would also be provided for improvements to the Leeds Liverpool canal towpath, with surface improvements from the station to the site to make the towpath more useable in all weathers and additional lighting being provided from Wellington Street Bridge up to the site

  A travel plan had been submitted which Officers had considered in great detail and were satisfied with, as were the Highways Agency and Metro. A range of physical and financial measures were to be provided including the provision of an on-site travel co-ordinator and a travel plan bond

  In terms of car parking provision, 1382 spaces would be provided across the site, with the Head of Planning Services stating that this figure had to be considered in terms of the quantum of development and the number of spaces was below the maximum UDP levels for car parking

  Reference was made to the objection received on behalf of the owners of the adjacent City Gate site. Notification of the revised scheme before Panel had been sent to the objector but no response had been received

  The Head of Planning Services recommended the scheme to Panel

  Members discussed and commented on the following matters:

·  the possibility of overlooking to the cottage at Oddy’s Lock from the residential block opposite

·  the location of the bin stores to the townhouses

·  whether flood defences in the city centre could impact higher up the river and affect this development

·  the height of the town houses

·  the high level of car parking within the scheme and the need for this

·  the travel plan and the need for further information about aspects of this

·  that only 15% affordable housing was being provided despite this being outside the city centre

·  the images shown of flat roof houses and the need for these to be avoided in the scheme

·  that building no 7 adjacent to Spring Garden Lock should be iconic

·  concerns at the amount of hardstanding shown on the graphics; the need for substantial amounts of usable green areas and that the success of the development would depend greatly on the palette of materials selected for the scheme

·  the need for flower beds and colour to be included in the landscaping proposals rather than solely grassed areas being provided

·  uncertainty about the proposed build out viewing platform next to building no 7 and whether there was a need for this

·  the need to take into account the otter survey

·  concerns that adequate signage was placed in the underground car parking areas to warn of potential flood risk

·  that the site could benefit from a railway station

·  that as the application was in outline, that the images shown were not necessarily representative of the final appearance of the scheme, however there was an opportunity to set out at an early stage the need for high quality design proposals and to question the siting of the town houses between two large buildings

Officers provided the following responses:

·  that the main windows of the cottage at Oddy’s Lock looked out to the area of open space and not directly at a residential block, with Officers of the view that this relationship was acceptable

·  in relation to the siting of the bin stores for the town houses, this level of detail would be included in the Reserved Matters application

·  regarding flood risk, that the scheme had been drawn up in consultation with the EA scheme and was consistent with that.  Whilst it was not possible to indicate any impact higher up the river, the Chief Planning Officer stated that the development had been drawn up to design flooding out of the area

·  that the town houses would be 3-4 storeys in height, with the 4^th floor being able to incorporate a roof garden

·  that the car parking levels were at the UDP maximum levels and that in terms of office space this equated to 1 space per 5 employees

·  in terms of the travel plan, that money would be set aside to encourage cycling and walking, with the on-site travel co-ordinator being able to use the funds in the best way possible to assist people to use alternative transport methods. There would also be a travel plan bond provided which would be for the steering group, which would be established, to consider the annual monitoring figures and implement any additional measures which would help to reduce car use. Furthermore Sustrans had recently given the city £100,000 for improvements to cycling provision which was welcomed

·  that the level of 15% affordable housing was the correct rate applied to areas like this on the edge of a city centre location as set out in Supplementary Guidance

RESOLVED -  To approve the application in principle and to defer and

delegate approval to the Chief Planning Officer subject to the specified conditions in the submitted report (and any others which he might consider appropriate); written agreement from the Department for Transport on the proposed highway alterations which could affect the QBI and the completion of a Section 106 agreement to include the following obligations:

  affordable housing

  provision of a Travel Plan Co-ordinator

provision of package of physical and financial measures as part of the Travel Plan

  funding of potential TRO measures on public highway

  public transport improvements

  off site highways mitigation package including trigger points

  24hr public access areas and linkages to other public routes

  maintenance package for public areas

  riverbank enhancement for the additional nature area

  public car parking tariff controls

  provision of bridge link

  local employment initiatives

  education provision

  public art provision

In the circumstances where the Section 106 has not been completed within 3 months of the resolution to grant planning permission, the final determination of the application shall be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer